0

NATIONAL SCHOOL OF POLITICAL AND

ADMINISTRATIVE STUDIES

Master in Communication and Advertising







Culture and Communication

Royal Nudity: Kate Middleton Case


Students:
Diana Cojocar
Ana Maria Gaspar
Ioana Maria Ilie
Roxana Iulia Toea
Ana Maria Popa

2nd Year




Bucharest, January 2014
1
I. Introduction

The theme of the paper is Private affairs gone public. According to this theme, we are
interested in the reconfiguration of the boundary between public and private spaces in the XXI
century. The case chosen for the issue proposed is the publishing of the naked photos of Kate
Middleton, the Duchess of Cambridge, while on honeymoon with her husband, Prince William, at a
private Chateau in France, at the beginning of September 2012. The event started first as a rumor
but quickly proved to be true by the issuance in the French publication Closer of the controversial
photos of Kate being topless.
The ones who read about the event or heard about it may have asked themselves: why do the
private lives of public figures is thought to be of public interest? Why does the public ask for the
sensational? These questions, given the fact that they represent the theoretical dimension of the
paper, will anticipate part of the concepts which constitute the foundation of our theoretical
framework.
We consider the case relevant for an in-depth understanding of the theme, given the fact that
the protagonists of the event are public figures, members of the British Royal House, and have been
in the attention of the media for a few years. Events like their royal wedding or the birth of their son
have been highly publicized. Taking into consideration the exhibited context, their actions/reactions
have benefited of a maximum visibility and have been highly debated.
A consequence of the fact that we are speaking about public figures, is the fact that we have
to give utmost importance to the boundary between public and private, establish if it has been
respected or not. We consider this research paper relevant in terms of analyzing the way in which
the private space was invaded and easily transposed into public space.
We will go on a journey of theoretical framework, commencing with Habermass key
concept of public sphere. Starting from this, we will also include in our research connected concepts
like public space, private sphere or private space. We will also approach the concepts of visibility
according to Thompson and mass media, the definitions and fundamental ideas being poached from
several sources.
We consider the concepts more than relevant in analyzing our case study, given the fact that
the private event analyzed concerns public figures from present times and could be considered
iconic for the interests of the Contemporary public body, the actors of the public sphere on a public
space setting.
2
Having said all of the above, we can safely state that the concepts mentioned earlier are in
connection to one another and with the case study to be analyzed in the following chapters. Thus,
mass media follows not only the public life (appearances in the public space, subjects discussed in
the public sphere), but also the private life of public figures, causing a breakage of the boundary
between the two aspects which should be totally different and not consist a hybridization of the two
oxymoronical concepts of private and public.
The research questions will represent the hard analysis through which we will try to find
out firstly where is considered appropriate to take pictures of public figures, in terms of public and
private boundaries, we will then try to analyze Europes position regarding the controversial
publishing of the pictures and based on what criteria did the mass media decided to publish the
photos. We will analyze the most followed online media channels, BBC, Daily Mail, The
Guardian, Telegraph, Independent and Mirror. We will analyze only official online websites, in
order to have a general coverage of the subject, press from the United Kingdom, being the most
affected by the issue in question.

II. Theoretical concepts

Public and Private sphere

What we will try in this theoretical section, is to comprise in a few pages the essential
ideas concerning the public sphere, starting from early age of existence of the concept until the
moment of speaking, a comparison with the term private, in an attempt to see where the boundary
between the two is nowadays, as opposed to where it was in Habermass bourgeois public sphere.
We will also approach the concepts of visibility according to Thompson and mass media, the
definitions and fundamental ideas being poached from several sources.
According to Habermas, the term public can be associated with any action, event,
manifestation to which access is granted to all citizens, as when we speak of public places or
public houses
1
. In his book one can find several associations regarding this term, depending on
the context; and that is where the difficulty in defining it exactly comes from. This being said, we
speak about public property when we refer to something that belongs to the state; on the other
hand, when speaking about public opinion, the reference is made to the opinion of the majority

1
Jrgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois
Society, Cambridge, Massachusetts, The MIT Press, 1991, p. 1.
3
while when referring to public appearances, it is common knowledge that everyone has access to
them. Another way to define the concept of public is to confront it with its antonymic pair, the
term private, which does not possess as many meanings as the former but refers to things which
on the one hand are not available to everyone and on the other hand contain personal features
which are not relevant to everyone.
2

Some help in better understanding what public refers to comes from Anca G who
approaches the concept of public space, referring to it as a physical space of different types, used
for different reasons, open to everyone who respects the rules of conduct and does not intrude
upon the well-being of others.
3

So far, we have discussed the terms public, private and public space. Continuing our
journey through public sphere, going back to Jrgen Habermas, we stumble upon another
interesting idea, that is, the public body, a concept which suggests that citizens behave as a
public body when they confer in an unrestricted fashion - that is, with the guarantee of freedom to
express and publish their opinions - about matters of general interest.
4

Revising the ideas, we find ourselves in front of a public body with the freedom to express
opinions about matters of general interest, that is, the freedom to have a public opinion, which
may gather in different public spaces, respect the rules of conduct and not intrude upon the well-
being of others. The terms public sphere and public opinion, according to Habermas, appeared for
the first time in the eighteenth century, in the ideal bourgeois public sphere, where the boundary
between the public and the private sphere was well determined. The bourgeois public sphere
arises from the lounges in France, the coffee shops in England and the public houses in Germany,
where the first matter of critical rational debate was literature.
This ideal public sphere collapsed along with the invasion of the private into the public,
causing difficulties for people in engaging in rational critical debates which eventually suffered an
expansion into the fields of economics, politics, mass media. The public sphere evolved from a
legitimate sphere of rational critical debates to a sphere of non-public opinions formed mainly by
the mass media who created a false public interest, a mass rather than a public. According to
Habermas, the public body lost not only its social exclusivity; it lost in addition the coherence

2
Daniela Landert and Andreas H. Jucker, Private and Public in Mass Media Communication: From Letters to the
Editor to Online Commentaries n Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 43: 1422-1434, 2011, pp. 1423-1424.
3
Anca G , Sur la ncessit dune distinction conceptuelle: sphre publique/espace public n (ed.) Anca G i
Adela Drgan Communication and Argumentation in the Public Sphere, vol. (1)3, Galai: Dunrea de Jos University,
2007, p. 539
4
Jrgen Habermas, Sara Lennox and Frank Lennox. "The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia Article." in New German
Critique. No. 3 (Autumn, 1974), p. 49.
4
created by bourgeois social institutions and a relatively high standard of education. Conflicts
hitherto restricted to the private sphere now intrude into the public sphere
5

Today, the public sphere has been reduced to broadcasting information and making public
any type of matter, as well as low participation to authentic debates. Thus, the public domain has
been infected and taken over by television, radio, newspapers and magazines of wide
distribution
6
. Otherwise said, the public sphere of the 20
th
century is based on four tendencies:
vulgarization, commercialization, theatricalization, fragmentation
7
. We consider these tendencies
pliable on the second half of the XXI century as well.
Trivialization (vulgarization), suggests making public those events, subjects characterized
through sensationalism, vulgarity and trivial. What we are talking about is that scandalous
discourse, which is based on and makes use of the emotional, shifting the public interest on to
gossip, towards other peoples lives and towards superficial subjects. Trivialization or better said
the thirst for sensational is directly manifested through mass-media and it appeared at the same
time with modernity
8
. The trivial aspects consist in very important features of the analyzed case,
given the fact that this is exactly the element which allows the establishment of a linkage between
public and private.
Commercialization manifests itself when the stress is put on the quantity rather than on the
quality. They have got the point where they would sell anything, as long as it is bought by the
client, without taking into consideration the consequences. These actions lead to the idea that the
media produces what it is thought that the consumer wants, not what he really wants. Which is why
the media aims towards the smallest common denominator, it produces garbage, vulgar material,
Americanized, tabloidized.
9

Fragmentation concerns the multitude of sources of information and abundance of TV
channels. Hence the fact that the public cant form an unitary image upon the events, being
overwhelmed by the filtered information which no longer keeps its accuracy.
10

Theatricalization or simply put, drama, suggests reducing public figures life to image,
appearance and stories under the form of entertainment or drama
11
In other words, public figures
play a certain role in front of the public body, trying to draw it on their side, letting it figure out

5
Jrgen Habermas, Sara Lennox and Frank Lennox, op. cit., p. 55.
6
Anca G, op. cit., p. 540.
7
Claudiu Coman, Sfera public i imaginea politic, Bucureti: C. H. Beck, 2010, p.15
8
Ibidem, pp.16-18.
9
Ibidem.
10
Thompson apud Claudiu Coman, op. cit., p.19.
11
Claudiu Coman, op. cit., pp.35
5
what it wants or even offering it what it wants or what it would want to hear or see, approaching
different means: symbolic elements, drama elements (acting and dressing), the illusion of
democratic involvement.
12
These being said, every voluntary exhibition is thoroughly planned so
as the image left to be positive. Of course, drama can be very unforeseeable and undesired events
may occur at any moment.
The private sphere in its present form involves removing certain aspects from the
individuals lives
13
, where the control belongs completely to them. Invading the private sphere is
usually followed by an emotional reaction. Psychologically speaking, the main emotions which
shape the private sphere are those of fear, shame and pride
14
, developing as a result of private
sphere invasion or threatening it. The private sphere manifests itself in intimate/limited circles
(family, friends) through conversations, actions, behaviors which are central occurrences in their
private lives. Unlike the public sphere which can only manifest itself in public space, the private
sphere has such a limit.
The private space has a well-established and confined physical space in which access is
limited. Private space usually is associated with private property, since the one who owns it has the
authority to make decisions regarding it, to decide who can invade it, with which one decides to
share it, in what way one chooses to make use of it. Of course, we should be aware of the fact that
all of the above are only theoretical aspects and that in practice, that is, in real life, private space
can be invaded by unauthorized persons which may have different interests.
Given the fact that the two concepts private and public have a very ambiguous
understanding at a common sense level, there is often confusion in what regards the difference
between them, even in scientifically articles. An example of such an article is Truth and Public
Sphere: Setting out Some Signposts (Raf Greens and Ronald Tinnevelt), where it is stated that
public space can be defined as mental space, open to discussions about certain subjects
15
. The
two authors go further and bring about the definition of public space either as a physical space,
either as a mental space fed by the debate of public subjects.
Taking into consideration all of the above, we could say that celebrities or famous public
figures are especially affected by this trespassing from public to private: identity hybridization
while stories about what happens in their lives are being told, the need to adapt the behavior from

12
Ibidem, p.36.
13
Ibidem, p. 6.
14
Mats G. Hansson, The Private Sphere as an Emotional Territory A Psychological and Evolutionary Perspective,
n The Private Sphere, Vol. 15(2), 2008, p. 34.
15
Raf Geenens i Ronald Tinnevelt, Truth and Public Sphere: Setting Out Some Signposts, in Does Truth Matter,
Vol. 1(1): 1-12, 2009, p. 2.
6
private life according to the public one and last, but not least, requesting/needing the respect of
private space.
16


Mass Media

The way people live their own reality influences their next moves. The origin of their own
reactions and initiatives is their way of own-representing, the pseudo-environment, which modifies
their interpretations and their positions. This is why, living in the same world, people live
differently and feel other things in other world-their own.
17

Marshall McLuhan affirms that In a culture like ours, long accustomed to splitting and
dividing all things as a means of control, it is sometimes a bit of a shock to be reminded that, in
operational and practical fact, the medium is the message, which means that the personal and
social consequences of any medium that is, of any extension of ourselves result from the new
scale that is introduced into our affairs by each extension of ourselves,
or by any new technology.
18

James Lull affirms that people live nowadays with much more information than ever before
and what happens today has the name of Information Age, the Digital Age or the Internet
Age, even the Communication Age which serve as a term that can be used to describe the
exciting new era. Nowadays era does not refer only to the efficient transmission of digitized bits and
but also to the significance that communication processes hold for real people as they engage the
entire range of material and symbolic resources at their disposal. Those resources include the whole
stock of traditional less-mediated cultural influences that make up the most taken-for-granted
aspects of everyday life.
19

The development of the communication media is a reworking if the symbolic character of
social life, a reorganization of the ways in which information and symbolic content are produced
and exchanged in the social world and a restructuring of the ways in which individuals relate to one
another and to themselves.
20


16
Kim McNamara: Publicising private lives: celebrities, image control and the reconfiguration of public space in
Social & Cultural Geography, Vol. 10(1): 9-23, 2009, pp. 19-20.
17
Paul Dobrescu, Ana Bargoanu, Mass media si societatea, www.comunicare.ro, Bucharest, p. 44
18
Meensakshi Gigi Durham, Douglas M. Kellner, Media and Cultural Studies, Key Words, Revised Edition, Oxford,
Blackwell Publishing, 2006, p. 107
19
James Lull, Culture in the Communication Age, London, Routledge, 2001, p. 1-2
20
John B. Thompson, The Media and the Modernity; A social thepry of the media, Cambridge, Polity Press, 1995, p. 11
7
John B. Thompson also says that mediated communication is a contextualized social
phenomenon as it is embedded in social contexts which are structured in various ways and which
have a structuring impact on the communication that occurs.
Sociologically speaking, the "mass " term refers to a specific way of gathering individuals ,
different from groups or public. Mass requires a huge number of people who do not know each
other, which do not communicate, do not have the same values and common goals. However, the
only thing they have in common is "the same cultural product consumption widely distributed
through modern technology."
21

Medias origin is Anglo-Saxonian , which consists the English word "mass", which refers to
the" mass "of the same cultural products consumers and the Latin word "media" which involves
fixing certain media messages. So media of Yves Lavoine has a polysemous sense: "a technique
set of message production and manufacturing handleble supports - which implies a certain time of
transportation; instantaneous transmission of messages through a particular channel (radio , cable )
to a terminal (receiver monitor); all messages created using this technique , all organizations that
produce or handle these messages."
22
The common element of the definition above requires the
communication process from a primary center to a plurality of secondary centers .
As a subdivision of the communication science, mass-communication has some common
characteristics with the interpersonal communication. The mass-communication is a complex
process, a challenge that implies negotiation, interaction and change equal as the conversation
between two people. In the contemporaneous era, the medicalization modifies the traditional limits
of private and public and the content of much interpersonal and inter-group communication is
influenced, even rebuilt of and through the mass-communication.
23

Mass-media, as a set of organizations that produces and handles messages, is characterized by
the following features: "the use of advanced techniques for mass production and distribution of
messages, rigorous organization and social reglementation of activity, sharing messages to large
audiences which are unfamiliar to the communicator and available to take forward the messages or
to deny them
24
. The media products are replaced periodically because they lose their availability
and so they experience a decline in value, therefore these products are replaced periodically. So the media
products are involved in a continuous stream.

21
John B. Thompson, The Media and the Modernity; A social thepry of the media, Cambridge, Polity Press, 1995, pp.
17-18.
22
Yves Lavoine apud Mihai Coman, op. cit. , p. 23.
23
Paul Dobrescu, Ana Bargoanu, Mass media si societatea, www.comunicare.ro, Bucharest, p. 111
24
D. McQuail apud Mihai Coman, op. cit. , p. 26.
8
According to Thompson, mass communication is "the institutionalized production and
generalized diffusion of symbolic goods by retaining and sending information or symbolic
content."
25

The characteristics of mass communication, they are listed below: "involves certain technical
and institutional means of production and dissemination of information"
26
; depends on mass
communication media industries undeniably; a message must satisfy the curiosity of public opinion,
thus becoming a commodity and obey the supply and demand principle; messages are transmitted
using one-way communication; the selection and editing of information occurs
27
; where media
outlets show their work is the public sphere; media institutions are public because the problems they
bring the question of interest to the public or trying to form a public opinion
28
.
When thinking of communication media there are some tools that provide the spread of
words: books, newspapers, television, radio, films, tapes, CD, TV, and Internet. That means
institutions and products which are commonly subsumed under the label mass communication-
which means a vast audience comprising many thousands and millions of individuals but most
important is that these products are available in principal to a plurality of recipients.
29

The individual members of the audience receive the media messages in socially atomized
setups. This is true of any type of media television, radio, newspapers, etc. Consuming the media
message is essentially a solitary activity. Even when all members of the family are watching
television together, each perceives, interprets and integrates the message in his/her own unique way,
dictated by their intellectual and cultural standpoint.
30

In contemporary society, the relationship between the external world and the individual is
dictated by the flow of mass communications. Individuals essentially are other-directed, meaning,
their education, leisure and professional ambitions are directed by the society at large, mainly
through the media.
31

Human beings have become atomized and isolated from each other as a result of
urbanization and other modern social structures. Social interactions have significantly diminished as
a consequence. People are deprived basic needs for intimacy. To fill this void, individuals seek out

25
John B. Thompson, Media i modernitatea. O teorie social a mass-media, Filipetii de Trg, Antet, p. 30.
26
Paul Dobrescu and Alina Brgoanu, op.cit, pp. 112-113.
27
Idem.
28
Denis McQuail apud Paul Dobrescu and Alina Brgoanu, op. cit, p. 112.
29
John B. Thompson, op. cit., p. 24
30
James H. June Leigh, Information processing differences among broadcast media: review and suggestions for
research in Journal of Advertising, vol.20, no.2, 1991, p. 73
31
D. McQuail, Media Performance, Mass Communication and the Public Interest, Canadian Journal of
Communication, vol.12, no.3, 1993, p. 38
9
attributes of media personalities that they can relate and identify with. This explains why political
debates have become an entertainment contest of personalities as opposed to an analysis of the
issues.
32

Individuals have conversations with their family members, peers, which are usually related
to the top media stories of the day. Hence, the mass media directs individual actions in a social
context. And the dynamic of these interactions have further say in whether opinions are retained,
modified or discarded.
33
When it comes to selection of programming, media executives simply go
by audience preferences, as this is essential for making profits. The basic motto is whatever sells.
This phenomenon is valid across television, radio and print. Even in news media, newsworthiness is
really about catching audiences attention through presentation of sensational, extra-ordinary and
emotionally pitched news stories. The actual relevance of these stories to the daily lives of the
audience is highly questionable.
The information flow in traditional media is generally top-down. For example, the
advertisers, government agencies, etc., push their message across due to their influence over the
corporate media. Whereas in the Internet-based media, the users are free to pull relevant
information, modify or comment on it, endorse or disapprove of it, etc., which gives the individual
more power than was erstwhile possible. This is a shift towards bottom-up and lateral flow of
information and from mass to individual audience.
34


Visibility

One of the most prominent authors who wrote about visibility was John B. Thompson.
According to him, visible means that which can be perceived through the sense of sight
35
.
In John Thompsons chapter The New Visibility in Theory, Culture, and Society, he notes
that the new visibility 'is a space shaped not only by the constantly changing technologies that
enable words and images to be recorded and transmitted, but also by the institutions and
organizations that have an interest in transmitting this content'.
36
Thompson claims that through the

32
Jack M. McLeod, , Scheufele Dietram A., Patricia Moy, Community, Communication, and Participation: The Role
of Mass Media and Interpersonal Discussion in Local Political Participation, Political Communication, Vol. 16, no. 3,
1999, pp. 315-336.
33
Robin Brown, American influences: the cult of spin. (American political campaigns), Historical Journal of Film,
Radio and Television, vol.17, no.4, 1997, pp. 481-484.
34
Philippe Boutie, Will this kill that? (effects of new digital media). Journal of Consumer Marketing, vol.13, no.4, 1996,
pp. 49-58.
35
J.B. Thompson, op. cit., 35.
36
http://epublications.bond.edu.au/hss_pubs/705/ retrieved on 20.01.2014.
10
media, previously hidden practices and events had been given an entirely new status as public; the
invisible had been made visible for all to see
37
. The author further questions the traits of the new
type of visibility, specifically in terms of the traits that have become pervasive of the modern world,
how they are different from other types of visibility, and what are the consequences of the new
types of visibility. Thompson draws attention to how different forms of media have distinctive
properties of interactivity with relation to the emerging significance of individually managed media,
such as blogs, has allowed individual managements of one-to-one and/or many-to-many,
synchronous or asynchronous communications, the changed situations adds more complexities to
the new visibility by making it decentralized, multiplied and dialogical.
38

Thompson explains that the internet and digital technologies changed the purpose of
visibility in a fundamental way. For prominent people, it makes it more difficult to control ones
image, because a much larger group of people can create and distribute content. He shows that
because of the development of mass media, visibility increased radically: Today we live in an age
of high media visibility, and those who hold or aspire to positions of prominence in public life find
themselves acting in an information environment that is very different from that which existed
several centuries (and even several decades) ago
39
. There is no denying that new media has
changed human communication, interaction unlike ever before. New media includes Internet,
mobile devices, electronic games, blogs and podcasting.
Thompson concluded stating that the visibility of actions and events, and the impact of
these words and images on the ways in which ordinary individuals understand what is happening in
distant locales and form opinions and moral judgments about it, have, in this age of mediated
visibility, become an inseparable part of the unfolding of the events themselves
40
.
Another remarkable author who debates de problem of visibility is Andrea Brighenti. He
argues that visibility should be adopted as a social category. The author is able to identify relational,
processual and strategic features and to describe three types of visibility: social type, media type and
control type. Brighenti states that visibility is a real social process in itself
41
and a site of strategy
in which we contest our visibility in contexts and where the normal is that which is unmarked,
unnoticed, unthematized, untheorized.
42


37
J.B. Thompson, 2005, 31.
38
http://mdharisurrahman.weebly.com/new-media-create-new-visibility-in-the-society.html accessed on 20th January
retrieved on 20.01.2014.
39
J.B. Thompson, op. cit., 48.
40
Ibidem, 49.
41
A. Brighenti, 2007, 325.
42
Ibidem, 326.
11
He argues that there is no visible without ways of seeing, which are socially and
interactionally crafted
43
. Therefore, he associates visibility with recognition. The author states that
the very social relationship producing recognition can produce denial of recognition, too.
Distortions in visibility lead to distortions in social representations, distortions through visibility
44
.
It is difficult to manage ones own social visibility on ones own terms because of the social
contexts that lead to one being misrepresented. Often, the relationship of visibility is controlled not
by the one who looks, but by the one who is looked at.
45

Brighenti suggests that the social effects of invisibility require the reworking of previous
distinctions such as public-visible and private-invisible as in the increased visibility of private
shopping mall of cities for example, and the dropping into obscurity of public parliamentary
debates. The mass media are high-visibility places endowed with the quality of conferring
visibility to the people who join them
46
. Visibility has a particular importance not only in making
identification possible, but also in breeding a culture of identification
47
.
The author concludes with the idea that in other words, visibility is not correlated in any
straightforward way to recognition and control, or to any specific moral value. As such, it does not
constitute anything inherently liberating, nor, conversely, does it necessarily imply oppression.
48

In John Thompsons chapter The New Visibility in Theory, Culture, and Society he
explains how strongly new media has impacted our culture. This essentially is the baseline for this
debate. Without new media, this new fame would not exist. New media has evolved into a platform
in which fame has found a new home. With that said, a new type of fame has been created and
offline fame and celebrity status has grown new parts. This has been both in detriment and benefit
of celebrities who have generated fame from offline platforms, but the issue has been a motivator
for user generated content from the general population on online platforms.
49

In conclusion, we can state that we are living in an information age, where revolutionary
technology has made the media more readily available than ever before. Outlets such as Wikipedia,
Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, YouTube and much more may be accessed on cell phones and the
news media update breaking news in mere seconds of its release
50
.With the development of the
media, the visibility of individuals, actions and events is severed from the sharing of a common

43
A. Brighenti, 2007, 329.
44
Ibidem, 330.
45
Ibidem, 331.
46
Ibidem, 332.
47
Ibidem, 333.
48
Ibidem, 340.
49
https://blogs.newmedia.edu/13ad486/ retrieved on 20.01.2014.
50
http://newmediapoli.wordpress.com/ retrieved on 18.01.2014.
12
locale: one no longer has to be present in the same spatial-temporal setting in order to see the other
or to witness an action or event. The rise of this new form of mediated visibility has transformed the
relations between visibility and power.
51

An example of visibility is the case of Kate Middleton, in which a French tabloid publishes
pictures of her topless during the holiday in Provence. Because of this, her private life became
public, creating a scandal by the media.

III. Analysis

Introduction

The British Royal family is one with big importance in the political field of the continent
and of the world, one with many eyes put on all the time. Taking peoples interest for this family
into consideration, mass-media is always eager to feed the consumers need for more.
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have been in medias attention for a few years and
have become mere celebrities. Press regards them almost as any other well-known couple, such as
Victoria and David Beckham, and try to reveal their everyday activities as if they were at public
interest all the time, even when they are not doing royal activities.
The marriage of Prince William and Kate Middleton has reshaped Britain monarchy and, it
was a very important moment in the life of British people. Mass-media took advantage of this huge
interest upon them and followed the couple everywhere. All the key moments in their lives were
made public and discussed on every channel on TV, press, radio, online sites, and so on.
Since Dianas death, the British media agreed to avoid publishing embarrassing photos of
the Royal House. But not all the press agreed with this pact and they tried to come with some more
every new story. This was the case of the nudity scandal. The pact was broken once paparazzi have
published naked pictures with The Duchess while she and her husband were enjoying their honey
moon at a private Chateau in France, at the beginning of September 2012.
The whole issue started as a rumor firstly, the Royal House initially declining to believe that
this could happen. After a while, the photos have appeared in the French publication Closer,
beginning to be spread quickly.
The event has saddened the Royal couple and brought back memories about Williams

51
J. B. Thompson, The New Visibility, 2007.
13
mother, Diana. St Jamess Palace even said that what Closer did was "reminiscent of the worst
excesses of the press during the life of [Princess] Diana."
52

The research questions that we will try to answer in this case study analyze the way media
presented the event and what role did the visibility of The Royal Family played in this scenario.

Research questions

The research questions are the following:
1. Where is considered appropriate to take pictures of public figure having in mind the boundaries
between public and private? Where does the limit of public stops? The analysts debate about how
paparazzi have access to some places and can take photographs of public figures, and how they
should not cross some boundaries that can affect the privacy of the subjects.
2. What was Europe mass-media's position after the pictures of Kate Middleton went public? We
will take in consideration journalists' opinion from online mass-media and the concept of visibility.
BBC, the most followed online media channel, has made a summary of these positions and presents
the opinion of journalist from all Europe about the event.
3. How did mass-media choose to present the incident after the photos that exposed a private
moment where published in Close magazine? The visibility of royal family plays an important role?
What facts did they choose to expose the most and what news articles have in common when
debating The Duchess photos?

Methodology

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge case is a paradigmatic example of the how mass-
media plays an important role in managing the visibility of public figures and how the privacy can
be invaded and exposed to the masses in short time.
The theoretical framework describes the concepts of visibility, mass-media, private, public,
and it helps us to better understand the relationship between some aspects that we will further
comment and analyze.
The purpose of the study is evaluative: to observe how media decides to frame such events
and expose them to the masses, knowing that they have the power to influence the way people

52
http://www.businessinsider.com/kate-middleton-topless-pics-2012-9 , retrieved on 17.01.2014.

14
perceive it.
The approach is illustrative in which we will examine one tightly defined period in time, just
after the Closer Magazine published the naked photos.
Regarding the problems that can arise while debating this case, we want to mention the fact
that is difficult to have an exact/visible limit between public and private. There might be some
issues on the fact that we cant have a broad research upon the articles that exist on the Internet to
sum up the common ideas that where spread in the media.
What we intend to do to solve these problems: the most influential online media sites are
chosen as main subjects for analysis (most followed press), we will use different theoretical
framework resources when trying to establish the limit between public and private.
The first two research questions are descriptive and the third one is explanatory. The first
one aims to show if paparazzi where entitled to take those photos or they crossed a limit. The
second one describes medias position in this entire situation and exposes a global view because the
comments are from different parts of Europe: Germany, UK, France, Spain, and Italy. All these
views are shown on BBC, the top leader of media channels in UK. The third question explains what
mass-media chooses to expose and what to neglect. This is useful because press can create the
agenda setting and influence people at some levels.
We chose to analyze six news articles from the most followed online press
53
that exposed the
event after 14 September 2012, such as: BBC, Daily Mail, The Guardian, Telegraph, Independent,
and Mirror. We chose both trustworthy online sites and tabloids because we want to have a general
coverage of the subject from the main sources of information in United Kingdom, where the event
had the most powerful impact. We will do discourse analyses to answer the research questions.

Presentation of analysis

Research question 1: Where is considered appropriate to take pictures of public figure
having in mind the boundaries between public and private? Where does the limit of public stops?
Mass-media has become a public sphere where authorized analysts comment the hot events
that may or may not have an important impact upon the audience. The public sphere created in
online medium, as the one that we will see later, generates opinions and attitudes that can guide the
perception of the public that follow this channel.

53
According to www.alexa.com retrieved on 18.01.2014.
15
Habermas says that public sphere is "made up of private people gathered together as a public
and articulating the needs of society with the state.
54
This definition explains the role of the media
voices that debate subjects such as Royal family naked pictures, that even though they werent at
public interest initially, they became important because they were published and, moreover, without
their consent.
The first actor of the public sphere is Roy Greenslade, Professor of Journalism at City
University, mentions in a BBC interview
55
about the editors code which says youre not to
photograph public individuals in private places without their consent. With other words, a
journalist is allowed to take pictures when the subjects are in private places only if they know that
are photographed and agreed to that. In The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge situation, this is not
the case. They were half a mile away from any public street, in a chateau that belongs to a relative
of the young couple. This means that the agreement is excluded.
The journalist says that you would need to have a public interest reason for overcoming
that, and I cant see there would be one. An exception of the rule can be to have a public interest
element. So if they were doing something that could affect United Kingdom for example, the
editors code would say that the paparazzi were allowed to cross the privacy boundary and expose
the photos. Again, this condition wasnt met, so from Roys point of view, the journalists took some
obviously intrusive pictures.
When asked about other similar examples of well-known people in the broadcasted world,
snapped in private moments such as Williams brother scandal in Last Vegas, not long before, Roy
Greenslade argued that those two sets of pictures were taken in what they call a public place. In the
case of the Duchess of Cambridge she was in a private place and private places are regarded as
places in which you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. In the other cases they do it by
appearing in public so if you speak of the lecture of the code, clearly newspapers were doing then
they were ok. Even though he compared two similar cases about publishing naked pictures with the
members of the Royal Family, the conclusions are different. The only thing that changes is the
physical location of the subjects. On other world, the public and private aspects are mostly physical
and less psychological.
PR guru, Max Cisotti, declared for Daily Mail
56
that France has strict laws regarding this

54
Jrgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois
Society, Cambridge, Massachusetts, The MIT Press, 1991, p. 176.
55
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9751000/9751920.stm, retrieved on 20.01.2014.
56
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2202895/Kate-Middleton-topless-photos-Closer-Royals-confirm-legal-
action-French-magazine.html , retrieved on 22.01.2014.
16
kind of intrusion from the paparazzi. He thinks that from the legal point of view the magazines that
dont have the consent of subjects cant have any chance in court, regardless the location of the
target: French magazines get sued every other week. It is part and parcel of magazines in France
because you are not allowed to photograph anybody without their consent whether on private or
public property. This is even a more strict argument that the previous one.
Daily Mail writes that Britain's close neighbor (France) considers that anybody has a right
to a private life, no matter how famous they are, and French publications tend to respect this
culture. So French culture is against revealing private moments, no matter of whom they are,
which makes this land a paradise for celebrities that want to relax in an intimate vacation. This was
not the case for Kate and her husband, which makes things more intriguing.
The Paris Court of Appeal upheld the following judgment: That's our culture and tradition -
the French believe that private life is not of interest to the public, whoever you are, and even if you
are having lots of affairs, for example.
57
Roys argument regarding the exception in which the
journalists had the right to take photos (the public interest) is not valid in Paris Court and culture.
Taking everything into account, analysts from UK have more permissive moral and legal
laws that accept the photographs of public figure if they are on public domain and at public interest.
On the other hand, French analysts consider that private life in this country is something sacred and
to be protected, so they dont agree with the previous opinion. Paparazzi are banned for revealing
photos took on private places because it infringes the right to privacy of the person in question.

Question 2: What was Europe mass-media's position after the pictures of Kate Middleton
went public?
Nowadays, living in the era of media visibility, the information spreads a lot faster and
targeted people had fewer chances to avoid embarrassing situations like this. Being previously
discussed how the boundary between public and private has been crossed. We will try to look at this
situation from different angles.
Starting with the French publication, Sonia Delesalle-Stolper says in France's Liberation:
Last week the photos were offered to the British press, which, in a splendid impulse of
virtue, declined the offer. Rather than a sense of propriety, the chief reason for this is that
newspapers on the other side of the Channel have been treading very carefully since the News of the

57
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2202895/Kate-Middleton-topless-photos-Closer-Royals-confirm-legal-
action-French-magazine.html , retrieved on 23.01.2014.
17
World scandal and the illegal phone hacking of public figures.
58

She starts by somehow trying to diminish their role by saying that the French publication
offered the photos to the British press before they were released to the media, the latter declining
their offer due to the previously mentioned pact. The correspondent explains that the British press is
afraid to publish the photos, having in mind the scandal in 2011.
59
She tries to show some kind of
bravery from the side of the French publications, also enlightening the cowardness of the British
ones.
Furthermore, JF Alonso and N.Collisa in Spain's ABC:
In Spain, the line followed by the courts in lawsuits about honor, privacy or personal images labors
under the legacy of the Franco-era restrictions on freedom of expression. Judicial sources admit
that, in order to compensate for the lack of freedom of those years, the interpretation has perhaps
become too lax and "leeway" has been given to the media.
60

They say that now the Spanish press has the freedom to choose subjects easily, taking into
consideration the softer repercussions they may suffer. Moreover, in El Pais they explain::
Traditionally the Royal Family never takes legal action against the media, but the images are
perhaps the most intrusive ever published of a senior member... Closer magazine is one of the great
celebrity scourges. The Grimaldi royal family of Monaco has filed several lawsuits over reports of
intimate moments.
61
The Spanish press acknowledges the fact that Kates pictures are perhaps the
most intrusive, and even though the Royal Family is not known for suing the press, this might be the
case. They even blame Closer for publishing such pictures, enforcing their belief with several
lawsuits of their own Royal House.
Francesco Merlo point of view in Italy's La Repubblica is:
The owner of Mondadori [Silvio Berlusconi] said no to Buckingham Palace's request... not
to publish the topless photos of Princess Kate, thus finally bringing to a triumphal outcome the
famous conflict of interest. It's an unexpected outcome, but prurient and grotesque, perfect for
vaudeville and above all for the burlesque that is the password that Berlusconi himself has chosen
for his own destiny.
62

He blames Silvio Berlusconis choice to publish the pictures, blaming that he ignored the
Palaces request. On top of this, Francesco Merlo states that its in Berlusconis character to do that,

58
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19622316, retrieved on 18.01.2014.
59
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/apr/05/phone-hacking-affair-now-journalists-arrested, retrieved on
23.01.2014.
60
Idem.
61
idem.
62
Idem.
18
its so specific of him. Somehow, Francesco Merlo shows some concern regarding Italys future
affairs with the United Kingdom. Coming in her fathers defense, Marina Berlusconi says in the
same newspaper: What should my father have done? Out of respect for the duchess's privacy and
heeding only his own political interests, should he have trampled on the editorial independence of
Mondadori, forcing it not publish that which the overwhelming majority of gossip papers, in every
part of the globe, would have competed with each other to have?
63
. She comes with a salesmans
argument that is the pictures present so much interest for the audience, her father shouldnt have let
aside the political interests between the two countries. On top of that, she sustains the independence
of the publication, enforcing its free speech and its editors free choice to choose the most
convenient subjects.
It seems that Silvio Berlusconis point of view is backed-up by other publications too, as
Vittorio Sabadin says in Italy's liberal La Stampa: The real problem, as Queen Elizabeth learned
while still a child, is that being a member of the Royal Family is a privilege with very high costs.
The role and duties mean that you cannot expect at the same time to be a Royal Highness and also
live a normal life like ordinary people... If you want to continue to play the part of a Royal
Highness, there are painful sacrifices to be made: no more strip-billiards, and topless sunbathing
only where you are really sure of not being seen.
64
Somehow, he encourages publishing the
pictures stating that the Royal Family should have in mind that their notoriety also comes with a
price. Moreover, he even blames the Princess for topless sunbathing without proper care. He says
that the title comes with the price of not having a normal life, and the Royal Family should have that
in mind.
As we can see, in three different politically sided newspapers the opinions seem to be the
same. Looking at Guia Soncini in Italy's left-wing L'Unita we can notice this: Britain is the country
that practically invented the notion of scandal-sheet journalism, but when it comes to princessly
boobs it rediscovers the notion of lese majesty. As if they had photographed her during an orgy, or
dressed as a Nazi (in both of which situations, to remind those inattentive to scandal-sheet
journalism, her brother-in-law Prince Harry has been immortalized).
65
She even blames the British
for being the ones that invented the term scandal, stating that its not such a huge problem, it is
something natural, not as the situations Prince Harry has been exposed to.
One can easily see that the opinions are shared on the continent. On one part of the story, we

63
Idem.
64
Idem.
65
Idem.
19
have Great Britain whose journalists refused to publish the pictures, having in mind their respect for
the Royal Family. On the other hand, we have countries like Spain, Italy and France where
journalists have no fear of lawsuits, not even thinking about the past.
We can also see Thomas Kielinger very interesting reaction in Germany's conservative Die
Welt: Will the Palace in London start legal proceedings in Italy, too? That is doubtful for now. And
what about cyberspace, which is beyond any supervision? Ireland's Daily Star has suspended its
website, but the same is not true of the sources bubbling on the world-wide web. Since Diana's time,
the media scene has changed dramatically. National self-restraint may apply in England - there is no
such code of conduct in the internet.
66
We consider it interesting because it makes no reference to a
persons right to privacy. For him, it doesnt matter if you are Royal or not, if anyone takes pictures
of you in the private sphere is ok. Moreover, he states that only the French publication will suffer
after this incident, because they were the first publishing the pictures.
We can easily see in the before mentioned article that besides the publications in the UK no
other media in Europe showed any concern about passing the boundaries of public. They simply
think that celebrity and royalty come with the price of not having a private life, being in the eyes of
the audience all the time.
Taking into account the upper statements we can easily notice that the newspapers are more
willing to crash boundaries than to show people trust and respect.
In this world of mediated visibility, information is difficult to control, time doesnt matter,
and producers dont require any more direct or immediate answers.
Electronic media facilitates the very fast spread of information, media organizations are all
concerned about having something new and of interest for their readers daily, they dont really care
about the boundary between public and private.

Question 3: How did mass-media choose to present the incident after the photos that
exposed a private moment where published in Close magazine?
Analyzing the UK press, specifically six of the most important publications, we can notice
differences and similarities in the articles in the way the editors viewed the situation. All British
publications refused to give their audience these pictures, being blamed by other European
countries.
The analyzed publications present this case as a very sad one, a huge mistake, a privacy

66
Idem.
20
invasion. The pictures were taken when the Royal couple was staying in a private chateau in
Provence, France. When looking and analyzing articles, we first see the obvious. The articles insist
on a grotesque mistake, on the fact that the French editor should be brought to justice and pay for
his mistake of publishing pictures that invade private sphere and also the articles keep us informed
which publications around Europe spread the pictures.
The case was also compared to price Williams latest photos in the media at a party in the
US. The difference between the two incidents is that in Prince Williams case, the location of the
party was a public place. Harry was filmed wearing a hat, sunglasses and colorful swimming
shorts, and socializing with bikini-clad women at a pool party...Harry in the nude with an unnamed
woman.
67

Some of the publications stressed the fact that : the prince had a "look of absolute thunder"
on his face as they left Kuala LumpurKate, meanwhile, "looked composed and was smiling"
68

Trying to support somehow the Royal family, the British mass-media focus on their somehow lack
of obvious reaction after receiving the news about the pictures. It is also stated that the family was
in an official visit in Kuala Lumpur when finding out the news.
On the other hand, the articles show the fact that the French editor does not regret what she
has done, it seemed like a normal article to her. She didnt consider that the Duchess privacy was
invaded. Closer editor Laurence Pieau said: "These photos are not in the least shocking. They show
a young woman sunbathing topless, like the millions of women you see on beaches."
69
As a
response to this lack of respect to a persons privacy the Royal House stated that the press has
invaded their privacy in such a grotesque and totally unjustifiable manner"
70

Mrs. Pieau insisted that she would fight any legal action, saying: These photos are not in
the least bit shocking.
71
Moreover, the photographer states: Ms. Suau described her pictures,
published in La Provence regional newspaper, as 'decent'.
72
The French press and editor consider
this issue a normal one that no boundaries were jumped, and moreover that no matter who the
person was she would have done the same. As a replica to this, a spokesman for the couple told
Mail Online: 'Their sadness has turned to anger and disbelief as we have learnt more about the
photographs. We believe a red line has been crossed and we are consulting the French lawyers to

67
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/sep/14/kate-middleton-topless-photos-closer, retrieved on 20.01.2014.
68
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19595221 , retrieved on 19.01.2014.
69
Idem.
70
Idem.
71
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2202895/Kate-Middleton-topless-photos-Closer-Royals-confirm-legal-
action-French-magazine.html retrieved on 22.01.2014.
72
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-middleton-topless-pictures-french-2090890#.UuPXXxD8LIU, retrieved
on 20.01.2014.
21
see what, if any, action can be taken.
73

Instead, Ms. Pieau insisted the photographs were 'joyful' and the text which accompanied
them was 'extremely soft. She added: 'We must not be too dramatic about this'.
74
The differences
of opinion between the two parts are huge. Even though the privacy rules in France are very
restrictive, it seems that the Closer editor did not care, sustaining her opinion that it was a public
place. The Royal House decided to sue the publication for this. The Duke claimed that they were
reminiscent of the worst excesses of the press and paparazzi during the life of Diana, Princess of
Wales.
75

Another publication in the UK presents a slightly different point of view: It is pure
jealousy, without a doubt. Think about the last year for this country: we have had two royal
weddings, a jubilee, the Olympics; we have been recognized twice as the most influential fashion
capital of the world ahead of America which is partly due to Kates global appeal.
76
, Tillman
said. He brings up something new, a political point of view over this entire situation. He states that
is all about jealousy, because the Royal Family was in the public eye with so many events in the last
years.
Independent brings out yet another point of view, this time of the UK Closer Chief
Executive Paul Keenan...said his company deplored the publication of the "intrusive and offensive
pictures" and had "complained in the strongest terms" to the firm which licensed the title in
France.
77
As we can observe, it seems to be a big gap between the same publications editors in
two different countries. The articles explain that the British have more respect for the Royal Family,
mostly after Dianas death they tried not to publish embarrassing articles regarding them.
Taking into consideration all the researched articles, we can say that the information has
spread quickly, reaching several publications in Europe, but the ones in the UK refused from the
beginning to give their audience such pictures. On the other hand, the Royal Family sues the French
publication, considering the incident a grotesque invasion of privacy. The Duchess and the Duke
keep their calm after receiving the news and go further with their visit in Kuala Lumpur, not
showing the others their anger and disappointment.


73
Idem.
74
Idem.
75
Idem.
76
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/9565729/Kate-Middleton-topless-pictures-are-a-French-
conspiracy.html retrieved on 21.01.2014.
77
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/royals-launch-legal-action-after-topless-kate-middleton-
photographs-in-french-closer-magazine-8138710.html, retrieved on 20.01.2014.
22
Discussions, limits, conclusions

The case is a rather controversial one, due to the fact that the boundaries between public and
private were smashed. The Royal Family never expected such an invasion, but the French editors
looked very calmly at this situation, stating that no boundaries were broken and they only
photographed a girls like one can see all over the world on the beach.
We were limited because we faced some king of editors monologue, with little or no
responded of the Royal House. It would have been more intriguing to find some Royal opinion
regarding the subject. Other limitations were the ones regarding time and space, analyzing only
some articles, and with the subject being some months old now some important article might have
been erased.
The first conclusion regarding this case is that it was an invasion of intimacy, one that no
one could have seen coming. The difference among opinions is considerable and must be taken into
consideration. Even if the British refused to publish such pictures, they spread very fast, due to the
internet speed and this century visibility.

Conclusions

Some of the conclusions show the fact that even though French laws and culture are stricter
regarding privacy issues, they were the ones that published the naked photos of Kate Middleton.
The online media, seen as a public sphere in which authorized analysts have debated, blames the act
of the paparazzi and exposes why they were crossing the editors code. First, journalists from UK
consider that paparazzi would had been legitimate in their action if they would took the picture in
public places or for public interest. On the other hand, French opinions claim that this was not
accepted even if they were in a public domain. The privacy is sacred and this should remain like
this. The conclusion should be that paparazzi are banned for revealing photos took on private or
public places because it infringes the right to privacy of the person in question.
Medias position all over Europe is different. Some of them are interested in the legal aspect
of the situation and how The Royal family never takes action against press (Spain), some discuss the
fact that British newspapers would never publish such photos, defending their own journalistic
ethical aspects (UK), Italian journalists are interested in defending Berlusconis decision to publish
the photos and that being royal involves some costs automatically, some of them accusing the
British newspapers of inventing the notion of scandal. This reveals that press from every country
23
has its own interest and tries to have an opinion that supports itself or blames how things are
happening in the neighbors yard.
The common ground of most of the analyzed articles expresses some facts such as: the
grotesque invasion of privacy that was done by the paparazzi, the case being compared to Harrys
latest photos in the media, the reaction of Closer magazine that didnt regret anything, and the fact
that the event brings back sad memories of how Princess Diana died while being chased by
paparazzi.
Summing up all the aspects, media has debated this subject at international level, bringing
arguments mostly against the action of Closer while trying to expose all the facts as quickly as they
were known, keeping the audience updated all the time. The visibility of the Royal family has been
the subject of both tabloids and trustworthy newspapers all over Europe. The public sphere that was
created has debated the limits of the mass-media regarding private and public aspects and how they
should not cross the limits because they can bring prejudices to the subjects in matter.




















24

Bibliography:

Books:
1. Brighenti, Andrea, Visibility. A Category for the Social Sciences, 2007.
2. Coman, Claudiu, Sfera public i imaginea politic, Bucureti, C. H. Beck, 2010.
3. Dobrescu, Paul; Bargoanu, Ana, Mass media si societatea, www.comunicare.ro, Bucharest.
4. Durham, Meensakshi Gigi; Kellner, Douglas M., Media and Cultural Studies, Key Words,
Revised Edition, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing, 2006.
5. Habermas, Jrgen, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a
Category of Bourgeois Society, Cambridge, Massachusetts, The MIT Press, 1991.
6. Lull, James, Culture in the Communication Age, London, Routledge, 2001.
7. Thompson, John B., The Media and the Modernity; A social theory of the media,
Cambridge, Polity Press, 1995.
8. Thompson, J. B., The New Visibility, 2007

Articles:
9. Boutie, Philippe Will this kill that? (effects of new digital media) in Journal of Consumer
Marketing, vol.13, no.4, 1996.
10. Brown, Robin American influences: the cult of spin. (American political campaigns),
Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, vol.17, no.4, 1997.
11. G, Anca, Sur la ncessit dune distinction conceptuelle: sphre publique/espace public
in (ed.) Communication and Argumentation in the Public Sphere, vol. (1)3, Galai: Dunrea
de Jos University, 2007.
12. Geenens, Raf; Tinnevelt, Ronald, Truth and Public Sphere: Setting Out Some Signposts,
in Does Truth Matter, Vol. 1(1): 1-12, 2009.
13. Habermas, Jrgen; Lennox, Sara; Lennox, Frank, "The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia
Article." In New German Critique. No. 3, Autumn, 1974.
14. Hansson, Mats G., The Private Sphere as an Emotional Territory A Psychological and
Evolutionary Perspective, in The Private Sphere, Vol. 15(2), 2008.
15. James H. June Leigh, Information processing differences among broadcast media: review
and suggestions for research. Journal of Advertising, vol.20, no.2, 1991.
25
16. Landert, Daniela; Jucker, Andreas H., Private and Public in Mass Media Communication:
From Letters to the Editor to Online Commentaries in Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 43:
1422-1434, 2011.
17. McNamara, Kim, Publicizing private lives: celebrities, image control and the
reconfiguration of public space in Social & Cultural Geography, Vol. 10(1): 9-23, 2009.
18. McQuail, D., Media Performance, Mass Communication and the Public Interest, Canadian
Journal of Communication, vol.12, no.3, 1993.
19. McLeod, Jack M., Dietram, Scheufele A., Patricia Moy, Community, Communication, and
Participation: The Role of Mass Media and Interpersonal Discussion in Local Political
Participation, Political Communication, Vol. 16, no. 3, 1999.

Online sites:
20. alexa.com
21. bbc.co.uk
22. businessinsider.com
23. blogs.newmedia.edu/13ad486
24. dailymail.co.uk
25. epublications.bond.edu.au
26. independent.co.uk
27. mdharisurrahman.weebly.com
28. mirror.co.uk
29. newmediapoli.wordpress.com
30. telegraph.co.uk
31. theguardian.com









26

EXAM LECTURES:
We all chose lectures 1,2,4.